ArticleEuropean heart journal2024
Legacy benefits of blood pressure treatment on cardiovascular events are primarily mediated by improved blood pressure variability: the ASCOT trial.
Article in European heart journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
31 citing papers in PubMed, 44 citations in OpenAlex.
- Blood Pressure Variability and Outcomes Across Antihypertensive Regimens.Hypertension (Dallas, Tex. : 1979) · 2026Trial
- Long-term benefits of atorvastatin on the incidence of cardiovascular events: the ASCOT-Legacy 20-year follow-up.Heart (British Cardiac Society) · 2025 · on this mapTrial
- Long-term visit-to-visit blood pressure variability and risk of cardiovascular and bleeding events: insights from the ENGAGE AF-TIMI 48 trial.Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension · 2025Trial
- Antihypertensive Efficacy, Safety, and Adherence After Switching From a Free Combination of Bisoprolol/Metoprolol and Amlodipine to Bisoprolol/Amlodipine FDC Tablets (5/5 mg) in Chinese Patients With Hypertension.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2026Article
- Asian expert consensus on high-quality hypertension management.Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension · 2026Review
- Article
- Within-visit and short- and long-term between-visit blood pressure variability as predictors of cardiovascular events and mortality in elderly Chinese.Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension · 2026Article
- Interactions between blood pressure variability, cerebral autoregulation, and covert cerebral small vessel disease in relation to cognitive performance in community-dwelling older adults.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2026Article
- Review
- Optimizing blood pressure control in multimorbid hypertensive patients: insights from a real-world taiwanese cohort.Journal of hypertension · 2026Article
- Differential Effects of Antihypertensive Drug Classes on Home and Office Blood Pressure Variability.International journal of hypertension · 2026Article
- From ASCOT to Asia: A More Active and Successful Approach in Preventing Cardiovascular Disease.Acta Cardiologica Sinica · 2026Review
- Research progress on the correlation between blood pressure variability and hypertensive microvascular disease.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Review
- Blood pressure variability and cerebrovascular risk in maintenance hemodialysis versus peritoneal dialysis: a comparative study.Renal failure · 2025Article
- Systolic Blood Pressure Time in the Target Range and Blood Pressure Variability: The Effects of Amlodipine-Based Therapy.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2025Article
- Amlodipine-Based Therapy and Its Effect on Time in Target Range and Long-Term Blood Pressure Variability Across Age Groups in Chinese Patients With Primary Hypertension: A Retrospective Study.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2025Article
- Blood Pressure Variability (BPV): What Clinicians Need to Know a 2025 Expert Consensus Report Endorsed by the Egyptian Society of Cardiology.High blood pressure & cardiovascular prevention : the official journal of the Italian Society of Hypertension · 2025Article
- Blood Pressure Variability and Risk of Cardiovascular Events and Mortality in Real-World Clinical Settings.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2025Article
- Blood pressure variability: a review.Journal of hypertension · 2025Review
- Impact of Variability in Blood Pressure and Heart Rate on Beta-Blocker Adherence.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimsVisit-to-visit systolic blood pressure variability (BPV) is an important predictor of cardiovascular (CV) outcomes. The long-term effect of a period of blood pressure (BP) control, but with differential BPV, is uncertain. Morbidity and mortality follow-up of UK participants in the Anglo-Scandinavian Cardiac Outcomes Trial-Blood Pressure-Lowering Arm has been extended for up to 21 years to determine the CV impact of mean systolic blood pressure (SBP) control and BPV during the trial, and amongst those allocated to amlodipine- and atenolol-based treatment.
methodsEight thousand five hundred and eighty hypertensive participants (4305 assigned to amlodipine ± perindopril-based and 4275 to atenolol ± diuretic-based treatment during the in-trial period (median 5.5 years) were followed for up to 21 years (median 17.4 years), using linked hospital and mortality records. A subgroup of participants (n = 2156) was followed up 6 years after the trial closure with a self-administered questionnaire and a clinic visit. In-trial mean SBP and standard deviation of visit-to-visit SBP as a measure of BPV, were measured using >100 000 BP measurements. Cox proportional hazard models were used to estimate the risk [hazard ratios (HRs)], associated with (i) mean with SBP and BPV during the in-trial period, for the CV endpoints occurring after the end of the trial and (ii) randomly assigned treatment to events following randomization, for the first occurrence of pre-specified CV outcomes.
resultsUsing BP data from the in-trial period, in the post-trial period, although mean SBP was a predictor of CV outcomes {HR per 10 mmHg, 1.14 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.10-1.17], P < .001}, systolic BPV independent of mean SBP was a strong predictor of CV events [HR per 5 mmHg 1.22 (95% CI 1.18-1.26), P < .001] and predicted events even in participants with well-controlled BP. During 21-year follow-up, those on amlodipine-based compared with atenolol-based in-trial treatment had significantly reduced risk of stroke [HR 0.82 (95% CI 0.72-0.93), P = .003], total CV events [HR 0.93 (95% CI 0.88-0.98), P = .008], total coronary events [HR 0.92 (95% CI 0.86-0.99), P = .024], and atrial fibrillation [HR 0.91 (95% CI 0.83-0.99), P = .030], with weaker evidence of a difference in CV mortality [HR 0.91 (95% CI 0.82-1.01), P = .073]. There was no significant difference in the incidence of non-fatal myocardial infarction and fatal coronary heart disease, heart failure, and all-cause mortality.
conclusionsSystolic BPV is a strong predictor of CV outcome, even in those with controlled SBP. The long-term benefits of amlodipine-based treatment compared with atenolol-based treatment in reducing CV events appear to be primarily mediated by an effect on systolic BPV during the trial period.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.